Liminal No. 2

Number 2 January 2012

IIHISAI

JOURNAL OF LIBERATION AND ANARCHY

« For the wildness at the pulse of this world »

METHODS

An update to Errico Malatesta's "Strategy"

We must prepare for the disruptions to the For my part, I believe both attitudes have their

western way of (pseudo)life which will inevitably advantages and disadvantages. In fact, in many

come to this world. How can we achieve our anarchists these two convictions complement

anarchistic aspirations with prevailing global one another. Adjusting our conduct to the

powers? How can we connect our thought to its demands of the ideal goal and the needs of the

effective application? situation brings about great practical

Because we do not necessarily recognise the effectiveness, while retaining the goal of true

authority of persons or texts and we base ourselves liberty and justice. To neglect all the problems

on free criticism, many of us spend our time of reconstruction or to prearrange complete

refining ideals without paying much mind to and uniform plans are both errors which, by

whether they are being communicated, different routes, would lead to our defeat as

understood or accomplished. It is difficult to tell a anarchists and to the victory of authoritarian

person that they are to chose their own path, free regimes.

of the State, free of oppressors, and free of It is absurd to believe that once the state has

relations based on commodity, when these are the been destroyed and capitalists have been

things they are synchronized with. Our ideal will dispelled things will look after themselves

not take hold within the current state. Some of us, without the intervention of those who already

according to this realization, have dedicated and have an idea of what has to be done and who

restricted ourselves to the destruction of present immediately set about doing it. Perhaps this

institutions of oppression and simultaneously could happen — and indeed it would be better

forget about the issue of creating new and if it were so — if there was time to wait for

recreating old social relations for our lives after the people, for everyone, to find a way of satisfying

destruction of the state. their own needs and tastes in agreement with

These anarchists seem to believe that the the needs and tastes of others. But social life

problems of reconstruction will not require does not permit interruption. In the immediate

preparation and planning now, as though all aftermath of the revolution, indeed on the very

people will become thoughtful and respectful if same day of the insurrection, food and other

state violence and capitalist privilege were urgent needs must be supplied to the

eliminated; as though conflicts of interest would population. Therefore to ensure the continued

vanish; and that prosperity, peace and harmony production of the basics, the replacement of the

would proliferate in the world. main public services and needs in urban areas

Others, motivated above all by the desire to be - (food, water, transport, etc.) in perhaps new

or to appear to be - practical are concerned with ways, and the uninterrupted exchange between

the perceived difficulties inherent in the aftermath city and countryside if cities are still dependent

of the revolution and aware of the need to win on them (for food).

over the greater part of the public, or at least Later the greatest difficulties will disappear,

overcome their ignorant hostility toward those Labor for food and necessities will no longer be

lives free of government and capitalism. They wish foreign and the monstrous urban

to set out a complete plan of social reorganisation conglomerations will melt away. The

which would respond to all problems and satisfy population will be spread out rationally over

the needs of the people. the world and every area, every grouping

We live at a LIMINAL. As a species,
humans have pushed this world to the
edge of its habitability. This publication
questions the intent behind the recent
actions of these creatures and documents
the struggle and creative reactions
against oppressive power relations. We
seek to create new spaces, restore
wildness and revisit old ideas in order to
live freely. In this LIMINAL existence we
will sabotage and dismantle the Machine
that threatens all that life is capable of.
We bring you a selection of thoughts in
the deceptive and incomplete - yet
liberating - form of printed language and
images. This industrial civilization will
not be tolerated because as a whole, it
cannot be tolerated. We hope the
(dis)contents of this journal inspire you
to get up and break the Machine that is
breaking the minds and bodies of too
many creatures, sentient and non-
sentient alike.

Anticopyright
All rights dispersed

LIMINAL

PO Box 7428

Minneapolis, MN 55407

Contact us with contributions of letters,

narratives, play scripts, poetry, Utopias,

dystopias, materials for review, native

seeds for guerrilla gardening,

ammunition, drawings, photos,

plagiarized materials, et cetera. Send

what you can for copies of following

issues.

in the early morning

the ship, the airy city

that crosses times

trembles, bells or screams,

bundles of grassconcretegrass, infinity

another form of my self asks

i was the strange one
did you think, the needs of ice;

what end of it you are on ?

who came close to knowing you

as an archer, pulling back an arrow

stretched JOYFUL ABSCOND

to cut the untidal strings

ones tensioned by the moon

dangling when everyone drops like

pillows

fluffed and dead

a spec of light rests on my hand

and carrying it to the imaginary house

setting it somewhere within

you pick it up and

using a spear with a coral dagger

carved with the infallible signs

do the same to the moon

cutting thru infinity

your blood and mine become one

(while conserving and adding to the natural world
they occupy and yet remain linked to human
society as a whole through a sense of sympathy
and solidarity), will in general be self-sufficient and
not afflicted by the oppressive and costly
complications of economic life now.

But these and a thousand other beautiful things
which come to mind are the concern of the future,
while we, here and now, need to think how to live
in today's world, in the situation that history has
handed to us and which revolution, an act of
violence, cannot radically change overnight by
waving a magic wand. And since, for better or
worse, we need to live, if we do not know how and
cannot do what needs to be done, others with
different aims will do it instead, with results quite
contrary to those we are striving for.

We must not neglect the common person, who
after all represents the majority of the population
and without whose involvement emancipation is
out of the question; we can only be as free as our
neighbor, but there is no need to rely too heavily
on their thought and initiative for such subversive
action.

The ordinary person has many excellent qualities;
they have immense potential, which gives the
certain hope that they will one day become the
humanity upon which we have set our sights. But
meanwhile they have one serious defect, which
largely explains the emergence and persistence of
tyranny: they do not like to think. And even when
they make attempts at emancipation they are
always more inclined to follow those who spare
them the effort of thinking critically and who take
over their responsibility for organising, directing
and commanding. So long as their habits are not
overly disrupted they are satisfied if others do the
thinking and tell them what to do, even if they are
left with nothing but the obligation to work and
obey.

This weakness, this tendency of the herd to wait
for and follow orders has been the bane of many a
revolution and remains the danger for the
revolutions in the near future.

If the crowd does not look to itself, right away,
people of good will, capable of initiative and
decision-making, must necessarily do things for
them. And it is in this, in the means of providing
for the urgent necessities, that we must clearly be
distinguishable from the authoritarian parties.

The authoritarians intend to sort the question by
setting themselves up in government and imposing

their program by force. They may even be in
good faith and believe sincerely that they do the
good of all, but in fact they would succeed only
in creating a new privileged class concerned
with maintaining the new government and, in
effect, substituting one tyranny for another.

Certainly anarchists must strive to make the
transition from the state of servitude to one of
freedom as unlaborious as possible, providing
the public with as many practical and
immediately applicable ideas as possible; but
anarchists must beware of encouraging that
intellectual inertia, stagnancy and above
lamented tendency of obeying and leaving it to
others to act.

To truly succeed as an emancipating force, for
the free initiative of all and everyone, the
revolution must develop freely in a thousand
different ways, corresponding to the thousand
different moral and material conditions in
which the people now find themselves. And we
must put forward and carry out as far as we can
those ways of life that best correspond to our
ideals. But above all we must make a special
effort to awaken in the mass of the people a
spirit of initiative and the habit of doing things
for themselves.

We must also avoid appearing to be in
command. We can do this by acting through
words and deeds as comrades among
comrades. We must remind ourselves that if we
are too zealous in forcing the pace in our
direction to implement our plans, we run the
risk of clipping the wings of the revolution and
of ourselves assuming, more or less unwittingly,
that function of government that we deplore so
much in others. And as a government we would
not be worth any more than the others. Perhaps
we might even be more dangerous to freedom,
because, so strongly convinced as we are of
being free and full of care, we could tend, like
real fanatics, to hold all who do not think or act
like us to be counter-revolutionaries and
enemies of the common good.

If what the others do is not what we would
want, it does not matter - so long as the liberty
of all creatures, within or without a society, is
safeguarded. What matters is that the people do
what they want while transforming the way
they are dependent on the state in preparation
for a revolution. The only assured conquests are
what the people do with their own efforts.

FICCIONES

WENDY MORELLI, YLVA OREN

EXHIBITION I (draft)

The monument is a monument of its own
oblivion. It receives meaning only when there is
someone who can give it meaning. It is the stone
you hold in your hand. If you have never
submitted. Only the river always shows the
correct time. When the stone is reflected, it is not
of vanity. Reflection reveals everything, not
stone. Stones and rivers are what you'd like to
know.

EXHIBITION IV (panoramic)

I moved my eyes towards the hills in the
northeast, where the new suburbs dominated,
then to how their New Year fireworks in the
distance looked like a brew of microorganisms,
swimming, floating, with hair, tails and rising or
constantly flickering, a living mass in which
some individuals died and others were
beginning, the steady pace, so the overall
brightness is kept constant, or almost, for a while
(maybe ten or fifteen minutes), before it all dried
up and crumbled, and only the first blue-black
sky remained with the same serene stars as
before.

S YLVA LAC AN

This leaf wrapped itself about my arm

as a tag or a plea?

I was accepted to the natural gang

Begged by them

We have the power in our own lives

to resist the lives oppressors wish we had

we are all proponents of myth

make the myths serve not their ends

not our ends, but the end of the present 'us'

KAHRI LEI§P

The directresses, somnambulent men in truth,
direful from the laughs of a few people who
come, flew, a version of coming. Clinging sex like
the end of the now hung first sorrow and
championed the coming of para-piping in the
stations. Watching buckles grow in seats and get

out young, ribboning language out the
plexigraphed mouthhole and animals like a kind
having dead drinks and old lies to dog grossly
inward about forest floors. But a few strings and
the rail moves forward, back never, the beach
crumbling in the noose while bees run over a few
times in the hall behind the stages of stacked
toungeclickings.

ARIEL BLANK

CONVULSIVE REMOVAL

(efil/dezilivic/eht/gnivael( ?)s 'namuhlalfoK ?)yrots/a)
From the steady autumn, despite the sinister
howls, he raked through the ravine as a
caterpillar not growing. After a desperate claim
he began the shooting game. Though it was
much more than one should carry, he takes all
the blame. In his violent travels, there's no time
for silly talk where you're set to stalk and stalk
that one moment of glory (likely in a pub). Then
you miss the train and the crawling lanes require
you to shed your chains - though this is a lot
more than I can handle.

INHALE

Wish I would smile in sunny days in the light
breeze; could lead me further. Someone would
call from beyond the maze of winter freeze and
draw me to their grey eyes seeing behind the
stage of dull stars and bleeding sunlight. Wish I
could stave silence away - the silent parts of all
that's left undone. Nights filled of snow and
velvet prayers and all you long for is light on the
stage, a ball without a chain, sweetheart's death
might make you stronger. Gaze with calm eyes to
crystal all the lies the trembling ground - what
have you done? I wish I could wake as the walls
start to quake from the impossible sound of her
heart leaves the sun. The summer breeze begone
and there, the leaves, that bleeding sun.

SILVANALUCA

Do I recall you as a dusty treed night? (have you
ever wavered, or always have you both these
qualities: a trepid stack of hay fell - freed and

pagan, our ardor has only = only matched by a
genuine opposite: a gushing river -as passionless
and fastmoving as the auto which drives the
person who drove the land which drives the sky
(an exploration of finer curves) finding it has
none but the sad ones where it started and
committed to memory healing zephyrs. The kind
that kill: falling hay falling snow, falling rock,
falling hands, even, for they recall best the lined
memory, hands are staring aches and loving the
firebreak which brought us to parallels) I believe
I recall dusty treed nights alone.

MIEP LEREAUX

You take an object, perhaps. Any object will do -
a sink. You've taken a sink. There may be several
about this habitat, kitchen, bathroom, bathroom.
The materials? Marble glass mountains. The kind
you roll into another, collide, pushing others out
of the halo you've drawn. Sinks break. You've
seen one break. Was it worth flinging about you
seem to ask yourself in the next installation of
thumbings. How many sinks are there - you
could flick your thumb a million times before
you question the workings, the tendons that
seem to snap elastically But any object will do. It
makes one think, how trivial an object, a world of
dead objects. You calm yourself enough to ask if
it is over - it isn't, but how?

JORGE VAHL

(Said in or with an accent redolent of the north
american southern regions (20 th century), set at
the beaten and deformed steel parallel beams
called railroad tracks (the kind large machines
that ran on a juice that came from the beneath the
planets surface whose extraction and overuse has
caused a great damage to many forms of life
would travel along, carrying many oddities) a
person with slicked white hair we cannot see
under an old black cap. They are naked. Their
sex is indistinguishable because we (who are
we?) have chosen not to distinguish it. They are
politically unattached we've learned (again,
how?)): Oh, my labour - when divided - consists
entirely of the fist clenching itself and the hammer,

resting or burying itself back in to the sludge earth I
have ruined in the undividedness. Division of labour?
Yes, if it were capable of being divided, I would divide
it to nothingness. (They bat at the air with their
hands, fists pushing air molecules, years away a child
trips nearby the dissintegratede tracks) Though, I
cannot. I am against such division, I suppose (They
pick up the long hammer and begin to sting
uniformly at one of the steel tracks, deforming it)
Almost like the kind of travel they thought impossible,
bringing to points together that warn't joined since
the plasmahot they wah born in. From (swings
hammer) the blood (swings) of the (swings) giant...
(swings). We've made more assumptions about the
other than we were permitted before the fall... now I
express myself in the ruins of a past I do not entirely
recall...

we are in a unique place

we could destroy ourselves

nuclear war, environmental destruction

the latter, an imperative; it's part of the system.

it's required of those who live in capitalism,

in modern industrial western society,

to compromise the environment

if we keep the current system

we are doomed

state capitalist institutions must fall

there is no other way

you must find your own to fight

you must find a way to contribute to a larger

struggle as well

stop voting

stop using banks

stop using currency

stop paying (taxes, etc.)

do it yourself

expand the floor of the cage and then break out

create the basis for going beyond the cage

find land with a group and grow food

you will not survive without food, water

you will not survive under divisive labor

feed yourself and feed your creativity

feed your neighbors

create real anarchist movements

LIMINAL

ANARCHY IS NOT PACIFIST

(Originally from issue no. 43 of A:aJoDA, Letters section. Appears here

edited, while retaining the message of the original by Laure Akai, an

unrepentant revolutionist from Moscow, Russia)

It would seem a number of persons in the anarchist
milieu are, in some form, opposed to violence. If the
individual is not totally opposed to violence, then they
may be opposed to anything but collectively engaged
violence such as mass insurrection); the individual's
decision to engage in such acts without the expressed
permission of an organized body is a horror to many. Even
the individual's choice of words may be called into
question as the anarchist is trapped by the bourgeois
media's games of attributing a single ideology to the
anarchist movement; there are individuals and
organizations that then try to redefine the ideology in their
own image, convinced that that if there are no monolithic
positions, then the movement itself is impotent. This
seeming attempt to define anarchy and anarchism as a
pacifist movement is deplorable.

An honest examination of the tactics of fawning to
conservatives is long overdue. (By conservatives I mean all
people who would conserve a system of wage labor,
political representation, policing and other anti-
immediatist forces.) So many of these liberal anarchists
don't want to alienate the media (one of the most alienating
and most disgusting of all institutions of power) because
they seem to believe that if they could just get their
message of peace and Utopia out to the masses, people
would understand the high moral desirability of anarchism
and only at that point, when people can consciously
consent to making changes in society, can we embark on
mass social change without violence and bloodshed. As a
person who formerly held these opinions, I can understand
where this point of view is coming from and the need to
separate oneself, morally, from the agents of terror and
policing who rule the earth. The imperative to act morally,
however, has always been a part of the arsenal of the ruling
classes (who generally define morality to begin with).
When these morals infringe on others' rights to live, better
to get rid of them than to live with them forever.
Furthermore, in many people the decision to act morally,
or, in this situation, to publicly adopt some morality, has
more to do with a need to be recognized by others as a
paragon of virtue than to affect any real change via
examples of human behavior. This strategy of appealing to
conservative elements of society cannot be very effective in
the future for the following reasons:

1) technology has the capability to affect human
behavior and alter the way we socialize with remarkable
speed; the technological program can outpace and will
always be two steps ahead of the anarchist moral program;

2) such moralistic issues such as equality can be
easily recuperated by the ruling classes whose ability to

muster public support is far greater than ours because they
are intentionally deceptive;

3) people can be morally opposed to a regime but
feel powerless to overthrow it, which gives any regime a
free hand to implement unpopular policies which
effectively negate the desires of the people;

4). the fact that anarchists don't make rebellions
more often actually works to their disadvantage; when
people have to look back into history to see the last
rebellions, it makes anarchism look like a thing of the past.
Despite what the pacifists feel, many people respect action
more than perfectionism. By appealing to the more
conservative elements, they may be discouraging some of
the more radical ones.

Another thing that the moralists seem to ignore is that
mass segments of society are dying to see some action and
real radical change. Go stand on a street in many New York
neighborhoods with a sign that says "Kill the police" and
you'll get a much warmer response than standing there
with a sign that says "No more killing - form a commune."
These liberal anarchists would think that the second sign
represents a far more productive alternative for people and
it's just that the people don't understand it yet because they
haven't been educated with the proper ideas. But perhaps
it is the over-educated of these types that alienate them
from the overwhelming misery of most people on the
earth. The current oppressive system can be full of
interesting potential for the liberal anarchist; what a nasty
interruption a social revolution would be. Many people,
however, are more convinced that they could do with some
revolution right now and are not that concerned with
details like who is going to clean the compost toilets; these
people are far more ready to rock and roll than the liberal
anarchist and for obvious reasons. They have no interest in
the system at all; the anarcho-liberal is more at home in the
system and can be more effective at coping with its
standards.

While I agree that the problems of modern society are
too big to be assigned to one living symbol, this is a more
effective way for one living individual to attack the
minions of authority than say, blowing up the pentagon,
which would undoubtedly require an extraordinary
organized effort and would be a thousand times more
likely to lead to capture. Attacks on the right individuals
can be highly resonant; such acts can create terror in the
ranks of authority. It is important to frighten people, if only
to make them understand that they cannot act with
impunity.

The problem with terror campaigns, as anybody can
understand, is the high probability that they can cause a
public reaction where, out of fear, people would rally to
defend people and institutions that they normally could
not care less about or even dislike. On the other hand, each
successful act of resistance (be it terrorist campaign or
pacifist protest) sends the message out to others that they

«p» (» 3 «c»

a © ® gg; <§
& s 3 f | nl «

& a* S S P-'a ^

can take action. My bet is that there are thousands ready to
pick up the a gun, a monkey wrench or a wooden shoe;
they may just be waiting for others to start up the action.
(Anybody who has ever been in a semi-riot has probably
seen crowds of people waiting eagerly to shoplift - waiting

for the first person to smash a store window.) It may be
argued that periods of social unrest simply lead to ones of
reaction, but remember how much fun we all have
recalling the unrest.

Fuck capitalism, fuck civilization! &*

PINE

Tall dark trunk, relatively few and spreading horizontal limbs, delicate spraylike foliage. Widespread,

familiar, cone-bearing, evergreen trees with clusters of long, slender needles along the twigs. Nee

clusters bound at base into bundles; each bundle with 5 needles (2"-4" long). Male cones (catkins)

small, pollen-producing; female cones larger, woody, seed-bearing. Cones slender; tapering and

thornless. Height 80' - 100', diameter 2'-3'. (dwarf varieties in windswept northern areas).

White pines have been so extensively lumbered that few virgin trees, which once grew to heights of

200'-220', remain. Wood is light, soft, straight-grained and generally not as resinous as other pines.

All pines edible. Found dry to moist soil. One or more species throughout.

Use: Candy, cooked vegetable, flour, tea. The tender new shoots, stripped of their needles and peeled,

can be made into an acceptable candy when boiled until tender and then simmered in a maple syrup

or similar (20-30 min.) In emergencies the firm young male cones can be boiled and the inner bark can

be made into flour (dry and grind into meal and mixed with other flours); piny flavored but highly

nutritious. Chopped fine and steeped in hot water, the fresh needles make an aromatic tea rich in

vitamins A and C. The light green needles from the spring shoots make the best tea, but other needles

can be used as well. SPRING (shoots, inner bark, male cones) ALL YEAR (needles).

(WHITE PINE shown below)

SPRUCE

Spruces are steeple-shaped trees of cold climates with short, stiff, sharp-pointed somewhat 4-sided

needles that grow all around the twigs. Twigs rough when needles removed. Spruce cones are brown,

woody and drooping. Unlike firs, mature spruce cones are not erect and do not fall apart on the tree.

Their scales are thin, not heavy or thorny as in the pines. Bark is rough and dark.

Spruces grow north to the limit of trees, forests thinning down to dwarf specimens extending far into

the tundra. One species persists on mountaintops as far south as Georgia.

Use: Cooked vegetable, flour, chewing gum. In emergencies, the tender leading shoots can be

stripped of their needles and boiled, and the inner bark can be used like that of balsam fir (164). The

condensed and hardened sap, or pitch, is a familiar northwoods substitute for chewing gum.
Spruce beer is made from the fermented leaves and twigs of Red or Black spruces after being boiled

with molasses or honey or other sugars.
SPRING (shoots, inner bark) ALL YEAR (pitch)

RED SPRUCE

BLACK SPRUCE

A LETTER FROM SOME FRIENDS
IN OAKLAND REGARDING IAN 28

Let us start by apologizing; that our words may be
incoherent, our thoughts scattered and our tone overly
emotional. Forgive us, because the ringing in our ear
continues to interrupt our thinking, because our eyes
are bleary and we're weighed upon by the anxiety and
trauma of our injuries and the imprisonment of the ones
we love. As most of you are well-aware: after a full day
and night of street battles in Oakland, we were defeated
in our efforts to occupy a large building for the purposes
of establishing an social center. We're writing, in part,
to correct the inaccuracies and mystifications spewed by
the scum Media. But more so as to convey the intensity
and the urgency of the situation in Oakland to comrades
abroad. To an extent, this is an impossible task. Video
footage and mere words must inevitably fail at
conveying the ineffable collective experiences of the past
twenty-four hours. But as always, here goes.
Yesterday was one of the most intense days of our lives.
We say this without hyperbole or bravado. The terror in
the streets of Miami or St. Paul, the power in the streets
of Pittsburgh or Oakland's autumn; yesterday's affect
met or superseded each of these. The events of yesterday
confronted us as a series of intensely beautiful and yet
terrible moments.

An abbreviated sequence
Beautiful words are delivered at Oscar Grant Plaza,
urging us to cultivate our hatred for capitalism.
Hundreds leave the plaza and quickly become
thousands. The police attempt to seize the sound
truck, but it is rescued by the swarming crowd. We
turn towards our destination and are blocked. We
turn another way and are blocked once more. We
flood through the Laney campus and emerge to
find that we've been headed off again. We make the
next logical move and somehow the police don't
anticipate it. We're closer to the building, now
surrounded by fences and armed swine. We tear at
the fences, downing them in some spots. The police
begin their first barrage of gas and smoke. The
initial fright passes. Calmly, we approach from
another angle.

The pigs set their line on Oak. To our left, the
museum; to our right, an apartment complex.
Shields and reinforced barricades to the front; we
push forwards. They launch flash bangs and bean
bags and gas. We respond with rocks and flares

and bottles. The shields move forward. Another
volley from the swine. The shields deflect most of
the projectiles. We crouch, wait, then push forward
all together. They come at us again and again. We
hurl their shit, our shit, and whatever we can find
back at them. Some of us are hit by rubber bullets,
others are burned by flashbang grenades. We see
cops fall under the weight of perfectly-arced stones
For what feels like an eternity, we exchange throws
and shield one another. Nothing has felt like this
before. Lovely souls in the apartment building
hand pitchers of waters from their windows to
cleanse our eyes. We'll take a moment here to
express our gratitude for the unprecedented
bravery and finesse with which the shield-carrying
strangers carried out their task. We retreat to the
plaza, carrying and being carried by one another.

We re-group, scheme, and a thousand deep, set
out an hour later. Failing to get into our second
option, we march onwards towards a third. The
police spring their trap: attempting to kettle us in
the park alongside the 19th and Broadway lot that
we'd previously occupied. Terror sets in; the've
reinforced each of their lines. They start gassing
again. More projectiles, our push is repelled. The
intelligence of the crowd advances quickly. Tendrils
of the crowd go after the fences. In an inversion of
the moment where we first occupied this lot, the
fences are downed to provide an escape route. We
won't try to explain the joy of a thousand wild-ones
running full speed across the lot, downing the
second line of fencing and spilling out into the
freedom of the street. More of the cat and mouse.
In front of the YMCA, they spring another kettle.
This time they're deeper and we have no flimsy
fencing to push through. Their lines are deep. A
few dozen act quickly to climb a nearby gate,
jumping dangerously to the hard pavement below.
Past the gate, the cluster of escapees find a row of
several unguarded OPD vans: you can imagine
what happened next. A complicit YMCA employee
throws opens the door. Countless escape into the
building and out the exits. The police become
aware of both escape routes and begin attacking
and trampling those who try but fail to get out.
Those remaining in the kettle are further brutalized
and resign to their arrest.

A few hundred keep going. Vengeance time.

People break into city hall. Everything that can be
trashed is trashed. Files thrown everywhere,
computers get it too, windows smashed out. The
american flags are brought outside and
ceremoniously set to fire. A march to the jail, lots of
graffiti, a news van gets wrecked, jail gates
damaged. The pigs respond with fury. Wantonly
beating, pushing, shooting whomever crosses their
path. Many who escaped earlier kettles are had by
snatch squads. Downtown reveals itself to be a
fucking warzone. Those who are still flee to empty
houses and loving arms.

A war-machine must intrinsically be also a
machine of care. As we write, hundreds of our
comrades remain behind bars. Countless others are
wounded and traumatized. We've spent the last
night literally stitching one another together and
assuring each other that things will be okay. We
still can't find a lot of people in the system, rumors
abound, some have been released, others held on
serious charges and have bail set. This care-
machine is as much of what we name the Oakland
Commune as the encampment or the street
fighting. We still can't count the comrades we can't
find on all our hands combined.

We move through the sunny morning and the
illusion of social peace has descended back upon
Oakland. And yet everywhere is the evidence of
what transpired. City workers struggle to fix their
pathetic fences. Boards are affixed to the windows
of city hall and to nearby banks (some to hide
damage, others simply to hide behind). Power
washer try to clear away the charred remains of the
stupid flag. One literally cannot look anywhere
along broadway without seeing graffiti defaming
the police or hyping our teams (anarchy, nortes, the
commune, even juggalos). A discerning eye can still
find the remnants of teargas canisters and
flashbang residue. At the coffeeshops and delis,
friends and acquaintances find one another and
share updates about who has been hurt and who
has been had. Our wounds already begin to heal
into what will eventually be scars or ridiculous
disfigurements. We hope our lovers will forgive
such ugliness, or can come to look at them as little
instances of unique beauty. As our adrenaline fades

and we each find moments of solitude, we are each
hit by the gravity of the situation.

Having failed to take a building, our search
continues. We continue to find the perfect
combination of trust, planning, intensity and action
that can make our struggle into a permanent
presence. The commune has and will continue to
slip out of time, interrupting the deadliness and
horror of the day to day function of society.
Threads of the commune continue uninterrupted as
the relationships and affinity build over the past
months. An insurrectionary process is the one that
emboldens these relationships and multiplies the
frequency with which the commune emerges to
interrupt the empty forward-thrust of capitalist
history. To push this process forward, our task is to
continue the ceaseless experimentation and
imagination which could illuminate different
strategies and pathways beyond the current limits
of the struggle. Sometimes to forget, sometimes to
remember.

We'll conclude with a plea to our friends
throughout the country and across borders. You
must absolutely not view the events here as a
sequence that is separate from your own life.
Between the beautiful and spectacular moments in
the Bay, you'll discover the same alienation and
exploitation that characterizes your own situation.
Please do not consume the images from the Bay as
you would the images of overseas rioting or as a
netflix subscription. Our hell is yours, and so too is
our struggle.

And so please... if you love us as we believe you
do, prove it. We wish so desperately that you were
with us in body, but we know most of you cannot
be. Spread the commune to your own locales. Ten
cities have already announced their intentions to
hold solidarity demonstrations tonight. Join them,
call for your own. If you aren't plugged into
enough of a social force to do so, then find your
own ways of demonstrating. With your friends or
even alone: smash, attack, expropriate, blockade
occupy. Do anything in your power to spread the
prevalence and the perversity of our interruption,
for a prolonged conflict; for a permanent presence;
for the commune, -some friends in Oakland

C N SA BOTAGE AS ONE Cr THE FINE ACTS

Who will revive the violent whirlpools of flame if not us ideology, and as a separated organ, representing
and those that we consider brothers? a class. We are for the autonomous self-
Come/ New friends: this will please you. organization of the exploited. History has shown
We will never work, oh tides of flame! through two clear examples that the traditional
This world will explode. form of the party (Russian revolution) and union
It's the true path. Forward, on the march. (Spanish revolution) were nothing more than two

—A. Rimbaud attempts to manage capitalism and not to

The spread of sabotage, its increasing practice, overcome it, and this is something that,

on a greater or lesser scale, far and wide against consciously or unconsciously, everybody knows,

the domination of the Machine is a given fact. In the seizure of power, it is not destroyed, but

Burning ATMs, disabling locks at shopping exercised: in the first case, the class of

centers, smashing shop windows, burning police bureaucrats replaced the bourgeoisie, and in the

vehicles and setting fire to the offices of temp other case, the anarcho-syndicalist leaders

agencies and employment offices, the sabotage of participated in bourgeois power, calling for the

the infrastructure of capitalism - the integrated self-management of every aspect of their lives

spectacle. All this is put into practice by and not just work. To be precise, both forms have

individuals bored with survival as commodities the exaltation of leaving aside the qualitative

(life reduced to economic imperatives and increase of life. This (practical and theoretical)

disillusioned with false opposition (more false defeat of the tradition organizations, which claim

and less oppositional with each day that goes to represent us, has not been absorbed by the

by), parties and unions that want to manage our working class (it seems that we only know how

misery and integrate us into a mode of to work), and we go along without maintaining

production that prevents us from any any possibility of control over essential aspects of

participation in the decisions that relate directly our lives, in a world that is developed, not only

to us and that assist in enslaving us, mutilating without our participation, but against us. But,

every gesture of negation of the existent. The comrades, history is not cyclic; it is a cumulative

spectacle writes the scenario and distributes the process and already weighs too heavily upon out

roles: worker, professor, student, housewife, weary bodies.

mother, father, son, daughter, male, female, The contradiction between the possibilities of

unemployed, police, soldier, artist, humanitarian, the means of production (the use of a few for the

intellectual.. .the majority, individuals who enjoyment of all, since most of them are useless

assume different roles in the course of 24 hours, and harmful and would be destroyed) and the

see their existence as still more terrible, assuming relations of production (waged exploitation,

this is possible. Everyone with their commodification, the exclusions of class society)

neurotischizoid viewpoint will react to the has reached an insurmountable point of rupture,

stimuli launched by power in the way that was In the spectacle it is easier to falsify the nature of

already expected. All social activity is planned in this contradiction than to increase mercantile

order to reinforce the spectacle, thus slowing production with increasing use value. This

down its unstoppable process of decomposition, inertia forces it to display by its own police of

Though we don't want to hear the shrieking of decomposed thought (pro-situationists, cadres,

militants in whatever organization, clearly we nongovernmental organizations, recuperators,

are not against the concept of "organization" as artists, journalists... the clique of politically

such but against "organization" conceived as an correct alternatives). These toilet brushes of

end in itself, as the crystallization of any modernity, like good priests, hope that with their

patches, the proper development of the system
will lead us, hand in hand, into an ideal world
planned by their false consciousness and by
putridity of their armoured brains; as if they had
ever given us anything. Their social function,
which has been denounced for decades already,
has been worth more to them than any
aggressions, beatings or assassinations, and we
are sure that these will not be mere anecdotes.
They deceive and manipulate us. We must not
allow them ta have a single day more. They are
the guardians to the keys of our informal chains.
They amuse us with insignificant debates. They
impose their opinions on us, avoiding questions
so simple that they make them tremble with
terror: How best to live? Who and what keeps us
from this? Questions that immediately unmask
the professionals of the lie. Critical coherence
and the critique of incoherence aid this
operation.

Injustice is not anonymous; it has a name and an

address.
— Bertold Brecht

Situationist theory, as integral critique of the
totality of the conditions of survival and of the
mercantile-spectacular capitalism that

necessitates them, has been confirmed in events
by falsification.

One cannot fight alienation by means of
alienated forms. The sabotage of this world starts
with the break with the roles the system imposes
on us, the sabotage of our death in life and the
refusal of the roles that they have allotted and
appointed to us. To speak of the Revolution in
these times is "to have a corpse in one's mouth".
We only need to look around ourselves to see a
scenario that constantly reminds us of the defeat.
Sabotage is thus an action that serves as a
propellant against the unreality that oppresses
us. A practice that has not gone unnoticed by
ideological recuperation, which has transformed
it into "terrorism" (the professionalization of
sabotage that has done no more than reinforce
the system, due to its centralist, hierarchical and
militarist character). Today, what is proposed is

not the creation of an armed organization of this
type, but widespread attack by small affinity
groups, uncontrollable by any higher
organization, that come together and dissolve
like the lunar tides. The tides that are born of the
awareness of how bad things are and of the
worsening that awaits us due to events.

In the 19 th century, such a practice existed that
put the incipient capitalism in check. Beyond the
Luddite attacks, the "proletarian rounds"
rendered their repression and recuperation, in
which the embryonic unions would play a role,
almost impossible due to their lack of a rigid
structure and their maximum flexibility in
attacks. A group of people came together, struck
and disappeared into the mass, while a new
group came together within it. Such widespread
sabotage makes it difficult for the enemy to
organize repression. Thus it transforms the
attack into a universe of pleasure for the
enlightened hooligan, the feelings of which are
impossible to describe or communicate with the
poor and banal language of words.

The game of subversion, the rules of which are
written by those that participate in it, becomes an
effective weapon against capitalism in all its
forms.

There is much more to destroy than to build.

Our epoch does not need to write poetic slogans, but

to realize them.
— Situationist International

It has been demonstrated that small groups
that attack do more damage than large
organizations that specialize in armed struggle.
The Angry Brigade continued its actions when
people were arrested and the English state
assumed the movement had fallen apart. The
Kale Borroka (street struggle) in Euskadi, which
Jarrai (the youth organization of the Basque
nationalist left, NDRO recently declared
uncontrollable is another example. Power has
difficulty repressing and eliminating little groups
that with complete security do not know each
other, and the only thing that unites them is the
desire for the destruction of a system that

prevents them from living and condemns them communication, smashing the apathy and

to survival and uncertainty. They don't attempt impotence of the eternal revolutionist

exhibitionist actions in order to make monologue. Relationships and the possibility of

propaganda as some acronym or mark of origin, contact with other people in the refusal of the

In the case of the Asturias, sabotage was a class spectacular role, these are transient situations

weapon used innumerable times, particularly in that in their preparation and development carry

labor conflicts with these enterprises: Duro in their essence the qualities of the revolutionary

Felguera, Hunosa, Naval and Ciata...(Asturian situation that will not retreat and that will

businesses and mines where sabotage was suppress the conditions of survival. It does not

determinant in the struggles going on in the fall into the irremediable alienating

1990's); every weary person, regardless of her or hierarchization that every specialized armed

his ideology, uses it. From the clerk who steals group of an authoritarian and militaristic

office supplies to the worker who damages the character, to which the masses delegate their

machine to which he is chained, passing through participation in the attack, carries within itself
the use of plastic explosives like the licensed The quantitative growth of this practice does

professionals of Duro Felguera. Today, the not come to us from the hands of propagandists

example is the burning of the ETTs (temporary of the spectacle, but rather by taking a walk

employment agencies). The practice of sabotage through the scenario of capitalism, and finding in

remains limited to precise and very localized this drift the burned ATM, the ETTs with

conflicts, without global perspectives, simply shattered windows, the smiths changing the

aiming for partial solutions with economic locks of a supermarket. These visions make our

demands that remain within imposed limits complicit smiles blossom and move us to go out

where capitalist logic unfolds. The same holds in that very night to play with fire with the aim of

the case of the ETTs, an attack that goes beyond making the same smiles rise on the faces of

the temporality of a conflict in one enterprise, but unknown accomplices through the fellowship of

that does not place wage slavery into question, destruction. The number doesn't matter, but

Instead it only questions its most extreme form, rather the quality of the acts: sabotage,

not aiming at putting an end to exploitation, but expropriation, self-reduction... they return part

rather to the ETTs. Today the conflict is global of the life that is denied us back to us, but we

and it is not resolved through partial struggles, want it all.

but through total struggle and through the Comrades, the game is yours and we take

refusal of this society as a whole. It is necessary courage in its daily practice. Organize it

to put an end to the reduction of our lives to yourselves with your accomplices,
commodities and to wage labor that wears us Against the old world in all its expressions, in

out, not just to ETTs. We must put an end to class order to leave pre-history let's launch and

society and not just fascism. Misdirecting our multiply attacks,
attention toward partial objectives only benefits

the managers of our misery and those who will FOR THE ABOLITION

one day lay claim to its management., and both OF CLASS SOCIETY

are among the targets for sabotage. AGAINST THE MARKET

The widespread practice of sabotage AGAINST WAGE LABOR!

(unhindered autonomy, maximum flexibility,
self-organization, minimum risk) among like-
minded individuals, opens the possibility for real
communication, destroying spectacular J M. \3i\mu ^ AJ\U rl.Mm.ii

FOR ANARCHY,

A decade to track down technicians to disable warheads

and deactivate nuclear power plants;

A generation to replace grocery stores with gardens and

cough syrup with elderberry and licorice root;

A century for dairy cows and toy poodles to go feral

Five hundred year to melt down cannons into wine

goblets, water pipes and sleigh bells

A millenium for the dandelions growing out of

sidewalks to become redwoods.

EXPECT RESISTANCE

excerpts from

AGAINST THE LOGIC OF
SUBMISSION

Wolfi Landstreicher

Introduction

Submission to domination is enforced not solely, nor even
most significantly through blatant repression, but rather
through subtle manipulations worked into the fabric of
everyday social relationships. These manipulations —
ingrained in the social fabric not because domination is
everywhere and nowhere, but because the institutions of
domination create rules, laws, mores and customs that
enforce such manipulations — create a logic of submission,
an often unconscious tendency to justify resignation and
subservience in one's everyday relations in the world. For
this reason, it is necessary for those who are serious about
developing an anarchist insurrectional project to confront
this tendency wherever it appears — in their lives, their
relationships and the ideas and practices of the struggles in
which they participate. Such a confrontation is not a matter
of therapy, which itself partakes of the logic of submission,
but of defiant refusal. It requires a subversion of the
existent, a development of different ways of relating to
ourselves, each other, the world and our struggles, ways
that clear reflect our determination to refuse all domination
and to reappropriate our lives here and now. I am talking
here of a real revolution of everyday life as the necessary
basis for a social revolution against this civilization
founded on domination and exploitation. The following
essays appeared in Willful Disobedience as the series
"Against the Logic of Submission". By no means do they
exhaust the question, but I think they provide a basis for
discussion as to how we can create ourselves, our
relationships and our struggle as our own in defiance of all
domination.

Against the Logic of Submission

A distinguishing factor of the anarchist idea of revolution
is the importance of the individual in bringing this about.
Although collectivist ideology has dulled this realization

even in most anarchist circles, it still manifests in such
choices as abstention from voting and military service. But
for those seeking to develop an insurrectional practice, this
realization needs to go much further than a few abstentions.
No revolutionary anarchist denies the necessity of a large-
scale uprising of the exploited to destroy the state, capital
and every institution of power and privilege. But revolution
is not a gift that falls from the sky or is granted by an
abstract History. Actions of individuals help to build the
circumstance which can make uprisings occur and can push
them in the direction of generalized revolt.

This means that rather than waiting around for the
revolution like certain marxists, trying to read historical
signs so that one will be ready, it makes more sense that we
anarchists consider ourselves to be in revolt at every
moment of our lives and attack this social order without
worrying about whether "the time is ripe". Individual acts
of revolt which are easily repeated and imitated provide the
basis for the development of forms of mass action in which
the individual is not lost and delegation is absent — that is
to say insurrectionary action that could destroy the present
reality and open the possibility for creating a world in
which every individual is able grasp all that they need to
fully realize themselves.

But equally important is the anarchist recognition of the
primacy of the actual, living individual (as opposed to the
collectivized cog and to the abstract concept of the
individual) is the recognition that we need to become a
certain sort of being, a being capable of acting on our own
terms to realize our own desires and dreams in the face of
the most fierce and powerful enemy: this entire civilization
— the state, capital, the technological system...

To live as a rebel, as a self-willed anarchist revolutionary,
requires a great deal of will, determination and spirit in the
face of dizzying odds. Thus, one essential aspect of
developing an insurrectional practice is the transformation
of oneself into such a spirited, willful being. Such a
transformation does not take place through therapy but
through attacking the social order both in its manifestations
in the world and in oneself and one's relationships. An
uncompromising cruelty may prove essential to this task,
because there are so many chains to be broken, so many
limits to be destroyed. As one comrade has said, the
individual quest is "the appropriation of everything that
has been subtracted from him through family, school,
institutions, roles, in order to find his specificity, totality,
universality, lost... in the process of domestication and the
construction of symbolic culture." So the point is to make
the decision to take one's life back in its totality, a decision
that requires just the sort of ferocity that will be necessary
to demolish this society. And such a decision will transform
all one's relationships, demanding a clarity that will leave
no room for submission to the demands of social protocol,
disrespectful tolerance or pity for those who fear the energy
of unchanneled desire more than its suppression. In making
this decision (and the decision is only truly made as one

acts to realize it), one is completely rejecting the logic of
submission that dominates most relationships.

A Projectual Life

An understanding of how the decision to live in revolt
against the present reality relates to desire, relationships,
love and friendship requires an understanding of how such
a decision transforms those who make it. The logic of
submission — the logic that the social order seeks to impose
on the exploited — is a logic of passivity, of resignation to
the mediocre existence offered by this order. According to
this logic, life is something that happens to us, that we
simply "make the best of", a perspective that defeats us
before we've begun to struggle.

But some of us burn with an energy that goads us
towards something else, something different. In our
burning we suffer anguish from every humiliation that the
present world imposes on us. We cannot resign, accept our
place and content ourselves with just getting by. Moved to
decisive action by our passion, against all the odds we come
to view life differently — or more precisely, to live
differently.

A social reality exists. It is smothering the planet with
commodities and control, imposing a pathetic and
miserable existence of enslavement to authority and the
market everywhere. Starting from a refusal of this imposed
existence, a decision to rise up against it, we are faced with
the necessity of creating our lives as our own, of projecting
them. We are posing ourselves a most difficult task: the
transformation of ourselves, of our relationships and of
existence itself. These transformations are not separate; they
constitute a single task — a life projectuality that aims
toward the destruction of the social order — that is to say
an insurrectional anarchist projectuality.

At present, so many of us are so careful, so apologetic,
ready to distance ourselves from even our most radical and
defiant acts. This indicates that we have not yet understood
what it means to live our lives projectually. Our actions are
still tentative, not full of ourselves, but stepped into lightly
with a readiness to withdraw at the least sign risk or
danger. Contrarily, the development of an anarchist
projectuality requires that one immerse oneself into what
one does without holding back, without hedging one's bets.
Not that this immersion is ever a finished project. It is a
thing in motion, a tension that must be perpetually lived,
perpetually grappled with. But it has been proven over and
over and over again that hedging one's bets as surely brings
defeat as surrender. Having taken this responsibility for our
lives, there is no room for half measures. The point is to live
without measure. Longer chains are chains nonetheless.

One reads in Nietzsche of amor fati. The very opposite of
the fatal resignation demanded by the logic of
submission,amor fati is that love of fate as a worthy
adversary that moves one to courageous action. It springs
from the willful self-confidence that develops in those who
put all of their substance into what they do, say or feel.

Here regrets melt away as one learns to act as one wills;
mistakes, failures and defeats are not devastations, but
situations from which to learn and move on in the
perpetual tension toward the destruction of all limits.

In society's eyes, any refusal of its order is a crime, but
this immersion into life moves insurgence beyond the level
of crime. At this point, the insurgent has ceased to merely
react to the codes, rules and laws of society and has come to
determine her actions on his own terms without regard for
the social order. Beyond tolerance and everyday politeness,
finished with tact and diplomacy, She is not given to
speaking abstractly about anything that relates to his life
and interactions, but rather gives weight to every word.
This comes from a refusal to skim the surface of things, a
desire rather to immerse oneself into the projects and
relations one has chooses to create or involve oneself in, to
draw them fully into oneself, because these are the things
with which one creates one's life.

Like revolution, love, friendship and the wide variety of
other possible relationships are not events one waits for,
things that merely happen. When one recognizes herself as
having agency, as being an individual capable of acting and
creating, these cease to be wishes, ghostly longings aching
in the depth of one's gut; they become possibilities toward
which one moves consciously, projectually, with one's will.
That burning energy that goads one to revolt is desire —
desire that has broken free from the channel that reduced it
to mere longing. This same desire that moves one to create
her life as a projectuality toward insurrection, anarchy,
freedom and joy also provokes the realization that such a
projectuality is best built on shared projects. Liberated
desire is an expansive energy — an opening of possibilities
— and wants to share projects and actions, joys and
pleasures, love and revolt. An insurrection of one may
indeed be possible. I would even argue that it is the
necessary first step toward a shared insurrectional project.
But an insurrection of two, three, many increases courage
and enjoyment and opens a myriad of passional
possibilities.

Obviously, the various modes of relating that this society
puts into place for us to fall into cannot fulfill this desire.
Tepid "love" partnerships, "friendships" based on the
camaraderie of mutual humiliation and disrespectful
tolerance and the daily encounters of no substance that
maintain the banality of survival — these are all based on
the logic of submission, on merely accepting the mediocrity
this reality we must destroy offers. They have nothing to do
with projectual desire for the other.

The relations that the decision to live projectually as a
revolutionary and an anarchist moves one to seek are
relations of affinity, of passion, of intensity, varieties of
living relations that help one to build life as desire moves
her. They are relations with clearly defined others who have
affinity with one's way of living and being. Such relations
must be created in a fluid and vital way as dynamic,
changeable and expansive as affinity and passion

themselves are. Such an expansive opening of possibilities
has no place within the logic of submission, and that in
itself makes it a worthy project for anarchists to pursue.

Free Love

Because revolutionary anarchists of all types have
recognized the freedom of every individual to determine
how they will live on their own terms to be a central aim of
anti-authoritarian revolution, we have spoken more often
and with more courage of the transformation of personal
life that must be part of any real revolution. Thus, questions
of love and erotic desire have been openly discussed in
anarchist circles from very early on. Anarchists were among
the first advocates of free love recognizing in marriage and
the absurd sexual restrictions imposed by religious
morality ways in which submission to authority was
imposed. Women such as Emma Goldman and Voltairine
de Cleyre recognized in puritanical morality one of the
greatest enemies to the liberation of women in particular as
well as humanity in general.

But the free love advocated by anarchists should not be
confused with the tawdry hedonism advocated by Playboy
and other promoters of commodified sexual liberation. This
latter is merely a reaction to Puritanism from within the
present social context. Its continued adherence to the logic
of submission is evident in its commodification and
objectification of sex, its dismissive attitude toward
passionate love — because it can't be quantified and priced
— and its tendency to judge people based on sexual
willingness, performance and conquest. Love and erotic
desire freed from the logic of submission clearly lies
elsewhere.

The struggle against the logic of submission begins with
the struggle of individuals to create the lives and relations
they desire. In this context, free love means precisely the
freedom of each individual's erotic desires from the social
and moral restrictions that channel them into a few specific
forms useful to society so that each may create the way she
loves as he sees fit in relation to those she may love. Such a
liberation opens the way for an apparently infinite variety
of possible loving and erotic relations. Most people would
only want to explore a few of these, but the point of such
liberation is not that one must explore as many forms of
erotic desire as possible, but that one has the possibility to
really choose and create ways of loving that bring him joy,
that expand her life and goad him to an ever increasing
intensity of living and of revolt.

One of the most significant obstacles presently facing us
in this area is pity for weakness and neurosis. There are
individuals who know clearly what they desire in each
potential loving encounter, people who can act and respond
with a projectual clarity that only those who have made
their passions and desires their own can have. But when
these individuals act on their desires, if another who is less
sure of themselves is unnerved or has their feelings hurt,
they are expected to change their behavior to accommodate

the weakness of this other person. Thus the strong-willed
individual who has grasped the substance of free love and
begun to live it often finds herself suppressed or ostracized
by his own supposed comrades. If our aims are indeed
liberation and the destruction of the logic of submission in
all areas of life, then we cannot give in to this. The point is
to transform ourselves into strong, daring, self-willed,
passionate rebels-and, thus, also into strong, daring, self-
willed, passionate lovers-and this requires acting without
guilt, regret or pity. This self-transformation is an essential
aspect of the revolutionary transformation of the world ,
and we cannot let it get side-tracked by a pity that degrades
both the one who pities and the one who is pitied.
Compassion-that feeling with another because one
recognizes one's own condition in theirs-can be a beautiful
and revolutionary feeling, but pity-which looks down at
another's misery and offers charity and self-sacrifice, is
worthless for creating a world of strong individuals who
can live and love as they choose.

But an even greater impediment to a real practice of free
love and the open exploration of the varieties of possible
relationships is that most people (even most anarchists)
have so little greed for, and therefore so little generosity
with, passion, intensity of feeling, love, joy, hatred, anguish
— all the flaming pangs of real living. To truly allow the
expansiveness of passionate intensity to flower and to
pursue it where the twisting vine of desire takes it — this
exploration requires will, strength and courage... but mainly
it requires breaking out of the economic view of passions
and emotions. It is only in the realm of economy — of
goods for sale — that greed and generosity contradict each
other. In the realm of uncommodified feelings, passions,
desires, ideas, thoughts and dreams, greed and generosity
go hand-in-hand. The more one wants of these things, the
more expansive one must be in sharing them. The more
generous one is with them, the more one will have. It is the
nature of these things to be expansive, to seek to broaden
all horizons, to take more and more of reality into
themselves and transform it.

But this expansiveness is not indiscriminate. Love and
erotic desire can manifest expansively in many different
ways, and individuals choose the ways and the individuals
with whom they wish to explore them. It makes no sense,
however, to make these decisions based on an imagined
dearth of something that is, in fact, potentially beyond
measure. Rather such decisions are best based on desire for
those to whom one chooses to relate and the potential one
perceives in them to make the fires of passion burn ever
more brightly.

The mechanics of erotic desire — homosexuality,
heterosexuality bisexuality, monogamy, non-monogamy
etc. — are not the substance of free love. It can manifest in
all of these forms and more. Its substance is found in those
who choose to expand themselves, to goad themselves to
expand their passions, dreams desires and thoughts. Free
love, like revolution, acts to recreate reality in its own

image, the image of a great and dangerous Utopia. Thus it
seeks to turn reality on its head. This is no easy path. It has
no place for our weaknesses, no time for neurotic self-pity
or meagerness. For love in its most impassioned and
unconstrained forms is as cruel as revolution. How could it
be otherwise when its goal is the same: the transformation
of every aspect of life and the destruction of all that
prevents it?

Passionate Friendship

We live in a world in which the majority of encounters
and interactions involve work and commodity exchange. In
other words, the dominant forms of relating are economic,
based on the domination of survival over life. In such a
world, it is no surprise that the concept of friendship no
longer has much value. Today, neither the daily interactions
of one's "communities" (these strange, disconnected
"communities" of family, school, work) nor the chance
encounters (at the market, on the bus, at some public event)
have much chance of sparking a real and intense interest in
another, an impassioned curiosity to discover who they are
what we might be able to create with them. The common
thread that runs through these not so varied interactions
and encounters is that they originate in the operations of
domination and exploitation, in the social order that
immiserates our lives an to which most people grudgingly
submit.

The sorts of relationships most likely to spring from such
a situation are those that reflect the humiliation and social
impoverishment inherent in it. Based on the necessity to
escape the isolation of a crowded, but atomized society, a
generalized "friendliness" that is slightly more than mere
politeness (since it permits harmless, light mockery and
safe, substanceless flirtation) develops. On the basis of this
generalized "friendliness", it is possible to meet some
individuals with whom to commiserate more closely —
people with whom to share a beer at the pub, go to football
games or rock shows or rent a movie... And these are one's
friends.

It really is no wonder then that what is called friendship
today so often seems to be nothing more than the
camaraderie of mutual humiliation and disrespectful
toleration. When all we really have in common is our
shared exploitation and enslavement to commodity
consumption and our differences mainly lie in our social
identities, themselves largely defined by our jobs,, the
commodities we buy and our uses to those who rule us,
there is really very little to spark pride, joy, wonder and
passion in our so-called friendships. If the deep loneliness
of massified, commodified society draws us to others, what
little our impoverished beings have to offer each other soon
leads to resentment. Thus, interactions between friends at
this time seem to be mostly dominated by comic mockery
and various forms of one-upmanship. While such forms of
play may indeed be amusing as part of a strong
relationship based on real mutual pleasure, when it

becomes the main way of relating, surely something is
lacking.

Some of us refuse to accept the impositions of exploitation
and domination. We strive to create our own lives and in
the process of create our live and in the process create
relationships that escape the logic of submission to
proletarianization and commodity consumption. By our
own will, we redefine our commonalities and our
differences, clarifying them through the alchemy of
struggle and revolt, basing them on our own passions and
desires. This makes the form that friendship tends to take in
this society completely unpalatable: to simply tolerate
another out of loneliness and call this one friend — how
pathetic! Starting from that sense of pride that moved us to
rebel, that point of selfish dignity that will not tolerate
further humiliation, we seek to build our friendships upon
the greatness we discover in each other — joy, passion,
wonder sparked both by what we share in common and by
how we differ. Why should we expect less of friendship
than we do of erotic love? Why do we expect so little of
both? Rebellion sparks fire in the hearts of those who rise
up, and this fire calls for relationships that burn: loves,
friendships, and, yes, even hatreds that reflect the intensity
of rebellion. The greatest insult we can give another human
being is to merely tolerate them, so let us pursue
friendships with the same intensity with which we pursue
love, blurring the boundaries between them, creating our
own fierce and beautiful ways of relating free of that logic
of submission to mediocrity imposed by the state and
capital.

Hatred

Having made the decision to refuse to simply live as this
society demands, to submit to the existence it imposes on
us, we have put ourselves into a position of being in
permanent conflict with the social order. This conflict will
manifest in many different situations, evoking the intense
passions of the strong-willed. Just as we demand of our
loves and our friendships a fullness and intensity that this
society seeks to suppress, we want to bring all of ourselves
to our conflicts as well, particularly our conflict with this
society aimed at its destruction, so that we struggle with all
the strength necessary to accomplishing our aim. It is in this
light, as anarchists, that we would best understand the
place of hatred.

The present social order seeks to rationalize everything. It
finds passion dangerous and destructive since such
intensity of feeling is, after all, opposed to the cold logic of
power and profit. There is no place in this society for
passionate reason or the reasonable focusing of passion.
When the efficient functioning of the machine is the highest
social value, both passion and living, human reason are
detrimental to society. Cold rationality based on a
mechanistic view of reality is necessary for upholding such
a value.

In this light, the campaigns against "hate" promoted not

only by every progressive and reformist, but also by the
institutions of power which are the basis of the social
inequalities (when I refer to equality and inequality in this
article, I am not referring to "equality of rights" which is a
legal abstraction, but to the concrete differences in access to
that which is necessary in order to determine the conditions
of one's life) that incorporate bigotry into the very structure
of this society, make sense on several levels. By focusing the
attempts to battle bigotry onto the passions of individuals,
the structures of domination blind many well-meaning
people to the bigotry that has been built into the institutions
of this society, that is a necessary aspect of its method of
exploitation. Thus, the method for fighting bigotry takes a
two-fold path: trying to change the hearts of racist, sexist
and homophobic individuals and promoting legislation
against an undesirable passion. Not only is the necessity for
a revolution to destroy a social order founded on
institutional bigotry and structural inequality forgotten; the
state and the various institutions through which it exercises
power are strengthened so that the can suppress "hate".
Furthermore, though bigotry in a rationalized form is
useful to the efficient functioning of the social machine, an
individual passion of too much intensity, even when
tunneled into the channels of bigotry, presents a threat to
the efficient functioning of the social order. It is
unpredictable, a potential point for the breakdown of
control. Thus, it must necessarily be suppressed and only
permitted to express itself in the channels that have been
carefully constructed by the rulers of this society. But one of
the aspects of this emphasis on "hate" — an individual
passion — rather than on institutional inequalities that is
most useful to the state is that it permits those in power —
and their media lapdogs — to equate the irrational and
bigoted hatred of white supremacists and gay-bashers with
the reasonable hatred that the exploited who have risen in
revolt feel for the masters of this society and their lackeys.
Thus, the suppression of hatred serves the interest of social
control and upholds the institutions of power and, hence,
the institutional inequality necessary to its functioning.

Those of us who desire the destruction of power, the end
of exploitation and domination, cannot let ourselves
succumb to the rationalizations of the progressives, which
only serve the interests of the rulers of the present. Having
chosen to refuse our exploitation and domination, to take
our lives as our own in struggle against the miserable
reality that has been imposed on us, we inevitably confront
an array of individuals, institutions and structures that
stand in our way, actively opposing us — the state, capital,
the rulers of this order and their loyal guard dogs, the
various systems and institutions of control and exploitation.
These are our enemies and it is only reasonable that we
would hate them. It is the hatred of the slave for the master
— or, more accurately, the hatred of the escaped slave for
the laws, the cops, the "good citizens", the courts and the
institutions that seek to hunt her down and return him to
the master. And as with the passions of our loves and

friendships, this passionate hatred is also to be cultivated
and made our own, its energy focused and directed into the
development of our projects of revolt and destruction.

Desiring to be the creators of our own lives and relations,
to live in a world in which all that imprisons our desires
and suppresses our dreams has disappeared, we have an
immense task before us: the destruction of the present
social order. Hatred of the enemy — of the ruling order and
all who willfully uphold it — is a tempestuous passion that
can provide an energy for this task that we would do well
to embrace. Anarchist insurrectionaries have a way of
viewing life and a revolutionary project through which to
focus this energy, so as to aim it with intelligence and
strength. The logic of submission demands the suppression
of all passions and their channeling into sentimentalized
consumerism or rationalized ideologies of bigotry. The
intelligence of revolt embraces all passions, finding in them
not only mighty weapons for the battle against this order,
but also the wonder and joy of a life lived to the full.

Realism

"Be realistic: Demand the Impossible!" This famous
slogan, which graced the walls of Paris in May 1968, was
truly revolutionary in its time, turning every common sense
conception of realism on its head. Now artificial, virtual
"realities" have come to dominate social relations. Life is
not so much lived as watched, and anything can be seen
with the new technologies. Considering this, it is no
surprise that a slogan once so challenging to an entire social
order has now become an advertising slogan. In the realm
of the virtual, everything is possible for a price. Everything,
that is, except a world without prices, a world of actual,
self-determined, face-to face relationships in which one
chooses one's activities for oneself and concretely acts upon
reality within the world.

The circuses that we are offered with our bread present
us with spectacles like none ever seen before. Exotic places,
strange creatures with magical powers, fantastic explosions,
battles and miracles, all these are offered for our
entertainment, keeping us glued to the spectator's seat, our
activity limited to occasionally flicking a button — not
unlike the primary activity in increasing numbers of jobs.
So "the impossible" this society offers us is nothing more
than spectacular special effects on a screen, the drug of
virtuality numbing us to the misery of the reality that
surrounds us, in which possibilities for really living are
closing down.

If we are to escape this miserable existence, our revolt
must be precisely against social reality in its totality.
Realism within this context becomes acceptance. Today
when one speaks sincerely of revolution — of striving to
overturn the present reality in order to open the possibility
of concrete, self-determined human activity and individual
freedom — one is being unrealistic, even Utopian. But can
anything less put an end to the present misery?

Increasingly, in the face of the juggernaut that is

civilization, our present social reality, I hear many radicals
say, "It's necessary to be realistic; I'll just do what I can in
my own life." This is not the declaration of a strong
individuality making itself the center of a revolt against the
world of domination and alienation, but rather an
admission of resignation, a retreat into merely tending one's
own garden as the monster lumbers on. The "positive"
projects developed in the name of this sort of realism are
nothing more than alternative ways of surviving within the
present society. They not only fail to threaten the world of
capital and the state; they actually ease the pressure on
those in power by providing voluntary social services
under the guise of creating "counter-institutions". Using
the present reality as the place from which they view the
world, those who cannot help but see the revolutionary
destruction of this reality in which we live as impossible
and, therefore, a dangerous goal, so they resign themselves
to maintaining an alternative within the present reality.

A more activist form of realism also exists. It is found in
a perspective that ignores the totality of the present reality,
choosing instead to see only its parts. Thus, the reality of
alienation, domination and exploitation is broken down
into categories of oppression which are viewed separately
such as racism, sexism, environmental destruction and so
on. Although such categorization can indeed be useful for
understanding the specifics of how the present social order
functions, it usually tends instead to keep people from
observing the whole, allowing the leftist project of
developing specializations in specific forms of oppression
to move forward, developing ideological methods for
explaining these oppressions. This ideological approach
separates theory from practise leading to a further
breakdown into issues upon which to act: equal wages for
women, acceptance of gays into the military or the Boy
Scouts, protection of a particular wetlands or patch of
forest, on and on goes the endless round of demands. Once
things are broken down to this level, where any analysis of
this society as a whole has disappeared, one is once again
viewing things from a place within the present reality. For
the activist realist, also known as the leftist, efficacy is the
primary value. Whatever works is good. Thus emphasis is
placed on litigation, legislation, petition to the authorities,
negotiation with those who rule us, because these get
results — at least if the result one wants is merely the
amelioration of one particular problem or the assimilation
of a particular group or cause into the present order. But
such methods are not effective at all from a revolutionary
anarchist perspective, because they are grounded in
acceptance of the present reality, in the perspective that this
is what is and so we must use it. And that is the perspective
of the logic of submission. A reversal of perspective is
necessary to free ourselves from this logic.

Such a reversal of perspective requires finding a different
place from which to perceive the world, a different position
from which to act. Rather than starting from the world as it
is, one may choose to start from the will to grasp her life as

his own. This decision immediately places one into conflict
with the present reality, because here the conditions of
existence and, thus, the choices of how one can live have
already been determined by the ruling order. This has come
about because a few people manage to take control of the
conditions of everybody's existence — precisely, in
exchange for bread and circuses, survival graced with a bit
of entertainment. Thus, individual revolt needs to arm itself
with an analysis of class that expands its critique,
awakening a revolutionary perspective. When one also
begins to understand the institutional and technological
means through which the ruling class maintains, enforces
and expands this control, this perspective takes on a social
and luddite dimension.

The logic of submission tells us to be realistic, to limit
ourselves to the ever-narrowing possibilities that the
present reality offers. But when this reality is, in fact,
marching toward death — toward the permanent eclipse of
the human spirit and the destruction of the living
environment — is it truly realistic to "be realistic"? If one
loves life, if one wants to expand and flourish, it is
absolutely necessary to free desire from the channels to
constrain it, to let it flood our minds and hearts with
passion that sparks the wildest dreams. Then one must
grasp these dreams and from them hone a weapon with
which to attack this reality, a passionate rebellious reason
capable of formulating projects aimed at the destruction of
that which exists and the realization of our most marvelous
desires. For those of us who want to make our lives our
own, anything less would be unrealistic.

Beyond Feminism, Beyond Gender

In order to create a revolution that can put an end to all
domination, it is necessary to put an end to the tendency we
all have to submit. This requires that we view the roles that
this society imposes on us with a cruel and penetrating eye
seeking out their weak points with the aim of breaking
through their limits and moving beyond them.

Sexuality is an essential expression of individual desire
and passion, of the flame that can ignite both love and
revolt. Thus, it can be an important force of the individual's
will that can raise her beyond the mass as a unique and
indomitable being. Gender, on the other hand, is a conduit
built by the social order to constrain this sexual energy, to
confine and limit it, directing toward the reproduction of
this order of domination and submission. Thus, it is an
obstruction to an attempt to freely determine how one will
live and relate. Nonetheless, up to now, men have been
granted more leeway in asserting their will within these
roles than women, a reasonable explanation for why more
anarchists, revolutionaries and outlaws have been men than
women. Women who have been strong, rebellious
individuals have been so precisely because they have
moved beyond their femininity.

It is unfortunate that the women's liberation movement
that reemerged in the 1960's did not succeed in developing

a deep analysis of the nature of domination in its totality
and of the role played by gender in its reproduction. A
movement that had started from a desire to be free of
gender roles in order to be full, self-determined individuals
was transformed into a specialization just like most partial
struggles of the time. This guaranteed that a total analysis
would not be possible within this context.

This specialization is the feminism of the present era that
began developing out of the women's liberation movement
in the late '60's. It does not aim so much at the liberation of
individual women from the limits of their gender roles as at
the liberation of "woman" as a social category. Within
mainstream politics, this project consists of gaining rights,
recognition and protection for woman as a recognized
social category under the law. In theory, radical feminism
moves beyond mere legalities with the aim of liberating
woman as a social category from male domination. Since
male domination is not adequately explored as an aspect of
total domination, even by anarcha-feminists, the rhetoric of
radical feminism frequently takes on a style similar to that
of national liberation struggles. But in spite of the
differences in style and rhetoric, the practice of mainstream
and radical feminism often coincide. This is not by chance.

The specialization of radical feminism actually lies in the
cataloguing of wrongs suffered by woman at the hands of
man. If this catalogue was ever completed, the
specialization would no longer be necessary and it would
be time to move beyond this listing of wrongs suffered to
an actual attempt to analyze the nature of women's
oppression in this society and take real, thought-out action
to end it. So the maintenance of this specialization requires
that feminists expand this catalogue to infinity, even to the
point of explaining the oppressive actions of women in
positions of power as expressions of patriarchal power, thus
freeing these women from responsibility for their actions.
Any serious analysis of the complex relations of
domination as it actually exists is laid aside in favor of an
ideology in which man dominates and woman is the victim
of this domination. But the creation of one's identity on the
basis of one's oppression, on the victimization one has
suffered, does not provide strength or independence.
Instead it creates a need for protection and security that
eclipses the desire for freedom and self-determination. In
the theoretical and psychological realm, an abstract,
universal "sisterhood" may meet this need, but in order to
provide a basis for this sisterhood, the "feminine
mystique", which was exposed in the 1960's as a cultural
construct supporting male domination, is revived in the
form of women's spirituality, goddess religion and a variety
of other feminist ideologies. The attempt to liberate woman
as a social category reaches its apotheosis in the re-creation
of the feminine gender role in the name of an elusive
gender solidarity. The fact that many radical feminists have
turned to cops, courts and other state programs for
protection on the practical level (thus imitating mainstream
feminism) only serves to underline the illusory nature of

the "sisterhood" they proclaim. Though there have been
attempts to move beyond these limits within the context of
feminism, this specialization has been its defining quality
for three decades. In the forms in which it has been
practiced, it has failed to present a revolutionary challenge
to either gender or domination. The anarchist project of
total liberation calls us to move beyond these limits to the
point of attacking gender itself with the aim of becoming
complete beings defined not as a conglomeration of social
identities, but as unique, whole individuals.

It is both cliched and mistaken to claim that men and
women have been equally oppressed by their gender roles.
The male gender role does allow a greater leeway for the
assertion of one's will. So just as the liberation of women
from their gender role is not a matter of becoming more
masculine but rather of moving beyond their femininity, so
for men the point is not to be more feminine but to move
beyond their masculinity. The point is to discover that core
of uniqueness that is in each of us that is beyond all social
roles and to make that the point from which we act, live
and think in the world, in the sexual realm as in all others.
Gender separates sexuality from the wholeness of our
being, attaching specific traits to it that serve the
maintenance of the present social order. Thus sexual energy,
which could have amazing revolutionary potential, is
channeled into the reproduction of relations of domination
and submission, of dependence and desperation. The
sexual misery that this has produced and its commercial
exploitation surround us. The inadequacy of calling for
people to "embrace both their masculinity and femininity"
lies in the lack of analysis of the extent to which both of
these concepts are social inventions serving the purposes of
power. Thus, to change the nature of gender roles, to
increase their number or modify their form, is useless from
a revolutionary perspective, being nothing more than
mechanically adjusting the form of the conduits that
channel our sexual energy. Instead, we need to
reappropriate our sexual energy in order to reintegrate into
the totality of our being in order to become so expansive
and powerful as to burst every conduit and flood the plain
of existence with our indomitable being. This is not a
therapeutic task, but rather one of defiant revolt — one that
springs from a strong will and a refusal to back down. If
our desire is to destroy all domination, then it is necessary
that we move beyond everything that holds us back,
beyond feminism, yes, and beyond gender, because this is
where we find the ability to create our indomitable
individuality that rises up against all domination without
hesitation. If we wish to destroy the logic of submission,
this must be our minimum goal.

Security Culture and Expansive Living

Life today is far too small. Forced into roles and
relationships that reproduce the current social order, it
focuses on the petty, on that which can be measured, priced,
bought and sold. The meager existence of shopkeepers and

security guards has been imposed everywhere, and real life,
expansive life, life with no limits other than our own
capacities exists only in revolt against this society. So those
of us who want an expansive existence, life lived to the full,
are moved to take action, to attack the institutions that
compel us to live such petty lives.

Moved to take back our lives and make them wellsprngs
of the marvelous, we inevitably encounter repression.
Everyday, hidden mechanisms of repression operate to
prevent revolt, to guarantee the submission that maintains
the social order. The necessities of survival, the underlying
awareness of always being watched, the barrage of
prohibitions that meet the eyes on signs or in the person of
a cop, the very structure of the social environments in
which we move, these are enough to keep most people in
line, eyes to the ground, minds empty of all except the petty
worries of the day. But when one has had enough of this
impoverished existence and decides that there must be
more, that she cannot tolerate another day in which life is
diminished even more, the repression ceases to be so subtle.
The spark of revolt has to be suppressed; the maintenance
of the social order requires it.

The expansion of life cannot occur in hiding — that
would simply be a change of cells within the social prison.
But because this expansion, this tension toward freedom,
moves us to attack this social order, to take action that is
outside and frequently against its written and implied laws,
we are forced to deal with the question of how to evade the
uniformed guard dogs of the ruling class. So we cannot
ignore the question of security.

I have always considered the question of security a
simple one, a matter of practical intelligence that anyone
should be capable of figuring out. By developing relations
of affinity, on decides with whom one can act. There is no
need to say a word about an action to anyone who is not
involved in it. This is basic and should go without saying
for anyone who decides to action against domination. But
such practical intelligence has no need to enshroud itself in
an atmosphere of suspicion and secretiveness where every
word and every thought must be watched, in which even
the words of defiance are considered too great a risk. If our
practice takes us there, we have already lost.

In the context of illegal activity, security is essential. But
even in this context, it is not the top priority. Our top
priority is always the creation of the lives and relationships
we desire, the opening of the possibility for the fullness of
existence that the system of domination and exploitation
cannot allow. Those of us who truly desire such an
expansive existence want to express it in all of our actions.
In this light, the call for the development of a "security
culture" seems strange to me. When I first heard the term,
my immediate thought was: "That is precisely the sort of
culture we live in!" The cops and cameras on every corner
and in every shop, the increasing numbers of identification
cards and of interactions requiring their use, the various
weapons systems put in place for national security, and on

and on — the culture of security surrounds us, and it is the
same as the culture of repression. Certainly, as anarchists
this is not what we want.

Many of the practical suggestions made by the
proponents of security culture are basic good sense for one
who is taking action against the institutions of domination.
It is obvious that one shouldn't leave evidence or speak to
the police, that one should take the due precautions to
avoid arrest — a situation that would certainly not enhance
one's struggle for a full free life. But it makes no sense to
speak of a security culture. The caution necessary to avoid
arrest does not reflect the sort of life and relationships we
want to build. At least I hope not.

When anarchists begin to see security as their top priority
— as a "culture" that they must develop — paranoia comes
to dominate relationships. Anarchist conferences are set up
with levels of bureaucracy and (let's call things what they
are) policing that too closely parallels what we are trying to
destroy. Suspicion replaces comradeship and solidarity. If
someone doesn't look or dress right, he finds herself
ostracized, excluded from involvement. Something vital has
been lost here — the reason for our struggle. It has
vanished behind the hard armor of militancy, and we have
come to be the mirror image of our enemy.

The anarchist struggle slips into this joyless, paranoid
rigidity when it is not carried out as an attempt to create life
differently, joyfully, intensely, but is rather treated as a
cause to which one is to sacrifice oneself. One's struggle
then becomes moral, not a question of desire, but of right
and wrong, good and evil, conceived as absolute and
knowable. Here is the source of much of the rigidity, much
of the paranoia and much of the unwarranted sense of self-
importance that one finds much too often in anarchist
circles. We are the righteous warriors surrounded on all
sides by the forces of evil. We must protect ourselves from
any possibility of contamination. And the character armor
hardens undermining the joyful spirit that provides the
courage necessary for the destruction of the world of
domination.

This destruction, this demolition of the social prison that
surrounds us would bring us face-to-face with the
unknown. If we confront it with fear and suspicion, we will
build the new prisons ourselves. Some already are, in their
minds and in their projects. This is why our projects of
attack must originate in and be carried out with joy and an
expansive generosity of spirit. The logic of paranoia and
fear, the logic of suspicion with its measured words and
deeds, is the logic of submission — if not to the present
order of domination, then to a morality that diminishes our
lives and guarantees that we will not have the courage to
face the unknown, to face the world in which we would
find ourselves if the present order were destroyed. Instead,
let's embrace the passionate reason of desire that defies all
domination. This reason is absolutely serious in its desire to
destroy all that diminishes life, confining it to that which
can be measured. And because it is so serious, it laughs.

Damn the torturers!

There is No democracy, state or law without misery and torture. They trivialize torture. The things
that surround a person in a political world require torture to be obtained.

Effective Subversion is unbearable to the State. All freedom which incites subversion
exposes gaps. When people are under a dictatorial regime, Subversion is the

ultimate expression of your health.

in the democratic system of law, accommodated citizens prefer not to see,

hear and talk about the daily torture that take place in prisons, police stations,

streets, slums, well-built homes, schools...

They want to believe that with the end of the political prisons, torturers remain

procedural history or files in the memories of ever-living freedom fighters. The torturer is a
vestige of fascism which sometimes takes the form of a government and, most of the time, is

disguised in democratic conduct.

The notion of crime, police, court and criminal breathes 3. hidden Continuity illtO

the Whole apparatus. The notion supports the need for police, court and all the penal

apparatus, gears kept in tune by torture. It establishes a vicious circle that everyone
accepts, finally, in the national and international courts.

They believe that the punishment they inflict forges universal values of humanity, that the
correct legal punishment is by torture and, if necessary, through use of the death penalty on behalf of
the democratic state of law and the good of humanity.

However, before judging a torturer, or formally condemn their activity, We need to knOW

their names and print them in the streets, the homes of families, schools
... learn where are the living, with whom they relate ...

Torture, as well as punishment, is not a legal institution, but a device of
power technologies.

Damn the tormentors!

Down with state terror and the torturers!
Let us not forget that democracy was born with terror!

Health!

oo

t/1

3^

t^

ra

X

• 1-1

o

■i-H

O

_l

CU

o